60 International Journal for Modern Trends in Science and Technology
Comparison of Bars Frame Building & Building with Slab and infill’s using Pushover Analysis
Chalavadi Koti Veera Naga Pavan1 | M.Srinivas Rao2
1PG Scholar, Department of Civil Engineering, Narsaraopeta Engineering College, Guntur.
2Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Narsaraopeta Engineering College, Guntur.
To Cite this Article
Chalavadi Koti Veera Naga Pavan and M.Srinivas Rao, “Comparison of Bars Frame Building & Building with Slab and infill’s using Pushover Analysis”, International Journal for Modern Trends in Science and Technology, Vol. 04, Issue 04, April 2018, pp.-60-69.
Outrigger systems have been efficient in stiffening the structure against lateral loads like wind or earthquakes. So, in order to know more about their effects on the structure and their behavior under earthquake loads, an overall seismic evaluation and comparison of 30 storey building located in zone 2 with conventional slab system having a central shear wall core and 1 outrigger level and flat slab system having central shear wall core and 1 outrigger level is demonstrated in this paper. Pushover analysis was performed using ETABS 9.7.4 on the models and using the performance parameters like Base force, Displacement, Storey drift, Spectral acceleration and Spectral displacement, relevant conclusions were drawn. The outrigger struts for both conventional and flat slab case was placed at 0.5h which is the most beneficial location for an outrigger level in a structure according to the literatures. Also, the status and location of plastic hinges at the performance point obtained from static pushover results showed that performance levels for almost all the models were found to lie in between Life safety to Collapse prevention range.
Keywords: Pushover analysis, Outrigger systems, Inter storey drifts, Plastic hinges.
Copyright © 2018 International Journal for Modern Trends in Science and Technology All rights reserved.
I. INTRODUCTION
Various civil structures are primarily based on prescriptive method of building codes and loads which acts on the structure are low and resulting in elastic structural behavior. A structure can be subjected to the force greater than the elastic limit.
The structural safety against major earthquake relate to the structural design of building for seismic loads. The earthquake loading behavior is different from wind loading and gravity loading which requires detail analysis to reach the acceptable elastic range in the structure. In dynamic analysis, the mathematical model of building by determining of strength, mass, stiffness and inelastic member properties are
assigned. Dynamic analysis should be performed for symmetrical and unsymmetrical building. The main objective is to create awareness about dynamic effect on the building with the help of ETABSv9.7.4software;it also Shows better response of building under dynamic loading and minimize the hazard to the life for all structures.
This analysis mainly deals with the study of a rectangular plan of G+14 storey’s RCC building and is modeled using ETABS. The height of each storey of the building is taken as 3m, making total height of the structure as 45m above plinth level.
Loads considered are taken according to the IS-875(Part1, Part2), IS-1893(2002) code and combinations are according to IS-875(Part5).
ABSTRACT
Available online at: http://www.ijmtst.com/vol4issue4.html
International Journal for Modern Trends in Science and Technology
ISSN: 2455-3778 :: Volume: 04, Issue No: 04, April 2018
61 International Journal for Modern Trends in Science and Technology By the past records of earthquake, the
demand about the earthquake resisting building is increased in seismic zones. These types of buildings are possible by providing shear walls at the core and edges of the building to withstand seismic effect.
Due to the provision of shear wall at core or at edges in multi-storied building we can resist seismic effect of earthquake. The loads are calculated by E-TABS software by providing shear walls at various parts of building.
1.1 SHEAR WALL: - It is a structural system composed of braced panels to counter the effects of lateral loads acting on a structure. Shear wall is called as shear panels. Shear wall are designed to carry wind loads and earthquake loads. Shear walls resist in-plane loads that are applied along its height.
Shear wall sections are classified as six sections 1. L-section
2. T-section 3. H-section 4. U-section 5. W-section and 6. Box section
In the present dynamic analysis L-type sections and box sections are used. For core shear wall box type section and for edge shear wall L type section shear walls are used.
In addition to slabs, beams and columns reinforced concrete buildings often have vertical plate- like RC walls called shear walls. These walls generally start from foundation level and are continuous throughout the building height.
1.2 Objective: - The main objective of this project is to check and compare the dynamic response of G+14 building with core and edge shear walls under different seismic zones, so one can pick the best substitute for construction in all earthquake-prone areas.
Core and edge shear wall in R.C. Building will be modeled in ETABSv9.7.4 software and the results in terms of storey displacement, storey drift, and storey shear are compared.
To study the comparison between lateral storey displacements and storey shears in building with core shear wall and building with edge shear wall
Comparison is to be made between core and edge shear wall building models in all earthquake zones i.e. Zones II, III, IV and V.
II. LITERATUREREVIEW
Mayuri D. Bhagwat et.al [1] In this work dynamic analysis of G+12 multistoried practiced RCC building considering for Koyna and Bhuj earthquake is carried out by time history analysis and response spectrum analysis and seismic responses of such building are comparatively studied and modeled with the help of ETABS software. Two time histories have been used to develop different acceptable criteria (base shear, storey displacement, storey drifts).
Mohit Sharma et al [2] In this study a G+30 storied regular building. The static and dynamic analysis has done on computer with the help of STAAD-Pro software using the parameters for the design as per the IS-1893-2002-Part-1for the zones-2 and 3.
AnujChandiwala considered five different models of 10-storey RC residential building located in india in seismic zone III and founded on medium soil, which is the reference ground condition. In this case the earthquake force is predominant then the calculated wind pressure, hence the structure is analyzed & designed for the seismic loading only.
Based on the analysis results they found that after the analysis of the different position of shear wall in the building configuration is the comparison in maximum base shear in X & Y-direction.
III. ANALYSIS&LOADS 3.1 Methods of Analysis
Equivalent static analysis: - All design against earthquake effects must consider the dynamic nature of the load. However, for simple regular structures, analysis by equivalent linear static methods is often sufficient. This is permitted in most codes of practice for regular, low- to medium-rise buildings and begins with an estimate of peak earthquake load calculated as a function of the parameters given in the code.
Response spectrum analysis: - It is a dynamic method of analysis. In the calculation of structural response the structure should be so represented by means of an analytical or computational model that reasonable and rational results can be obtained by its behavior, when response spectrum method is used with modal analysis procedure Time-history analysis: - In this analysis dynamic response of the building will be calculated at each
62 International Journal for Modern Trends in Science and Technology time intervals. This analysis can be carried out by
taking recorded ground motion data from past earthquake database. A linear time-history analysis of this type overcomes all the disadvantages of Response spectrum analysis, provided non-linear behavior is not involved.
Square roots of sum of squares :- In this method the building is considered as a flexible structure with lumped masses concentrated at floor levels, with each mass having one degree of freedom that of lateral displacement in the direction under consideration.
3.2 LOADS CONSIDERED
Loads on a structure are generally two types.
1. Gravity loads and 2. Lateral loads
Gravity loads: - Gravity loads are the vertical forces that act on a structure. The weight of the structure, human occupancy and snow are all types of loads that need to have a complete load path to the ground.
The gravity load contains Dead load and Imposed Load.
All permanent constructions of the structure form the dead loads. The dead load comprises of the weights of walls, partitions floor finishes, false ceilings, false floors and the other permanent constructions in the buildings.
The unit weights of plain concrete and reinforced concrete made with sand and gravel or crushed natural stone aggregate may be taken as 24 KN/m3 and 25 KN/m3 respectively. Live loads are taken as 2KN/m3.
Lateral loads: - Lateral loads are the horizontal forces that are act on a structure. Wind loads and earthquake loads are the main lateral loads act on structures.
Design Wind Speed (V)
The basic wind speed (V) for any site shall be obtained from and shall be modified to include the following effects to get design wind velocity at any height (V) for the chosen structure:
a) Risk level;
b) Terrain roughness, height and size of structure; and
c) Local topography.
It can be mathematically expressed as follows:
V = Vb X kl X k2X k3
Where,
Vb = design wind speed at any height z in m/s;
kl = probability factor (risk coefficient) k2= terrain, height and structure size factor k3 = topography factor
Pressure Coefficient:-
F= (Cpe – Cpi) A Pd Where,
Cpe = external pressure coefficient, Cpi = internal pressure- coefficient,
A = surface area of structural or cladding unit, and
Pd = design wind pressure element
Wind loads are applied on the structure as per IS 875-1987.i.e wind load in x-direction WLx and wind load in y-direction WLy.
Design Lateral Force:- The design lateral force shall first be computed for the building as a whole.
Earthquake loads are applied as per IS 1893-2002 in earthquake x-direction, y-direction Positive x-direction, negative x-direction, positive y-direction and negative y-direction and load combinations are considered as per IS 1893-2002.
Design Seismic Base Shear:-The total design lateral force or design seismic base shear (Vb) along any principal direction shall be determined by the following expression:
Vb = Ah W Where,
Ah = horizontal acceleration spectrum W = seismic weight of all the floor
Fundamental Natural Period:-The approximate fundamental natural period of vibration (Ta) in seconds, of a moment-resisting frame building without brick in the panels may be estimated by the empirical expression:
Ta=0.075 h0.75 for RC frame building Ta=0.085 h0.75 for steel frame building
T=.09H/√D Where,
H= Height of building
D= Base dimension of the building at the plinth level, in m, along the considered direction of the lateral force.
IV. ETABS
Etabs is the present day leading design software in the market. Many design company’s use this software for their project design purpose. The innovative and revolutionary new ETABS is the ultimate integrated software package for the structural analysis and design of buildings.
Incorporating 40 years of continuous research and development, this latest ETABS offers unmatched
63 International Journal for Modern Trends in Science and Technology 3D object based modeling and visualization tools,
blazingly fast linear and nonlinear analytical power, sophisticated and comprehensive design capabilities for a wide-range of materials, and insightful graphic displays, reports, and schematic drawings that allow users to quickly and easily decipher and understand analysis and design results.
4.1 Modeling of building using ETABS:
Procedure:
1. Open ETABSv9.7.4 and select grid only.
2. Define storey data like storey height, storey number and spacing in x and y directions.
3. Define code preference from option menu.
4. Define material properties of concrete and steel from the define menu.
5. Define section properties from frame section in define menu for columns, beams etc.
6. Define slab section from define menu.
7. Give supports conditions 8. Create areas for slabs.
9. From define menu, define static load cases like dead load, live load, wind load in x and y direction and earthquake loads in x and y directions according to the IS-Code preferences.
10. Assign loads.
11. Draw shear wall at core/edges.
12. Specify structure auto line constraint.
13. Specify response spectrum analysis.
14. Select analysis option and run analysis.
4.2 BUILDING DATA:
4.2.1 Geometric data:
Element – G+14 storey
Type of frame: OMRF (ordinary moment resisting frame)
Area of building-36mX22.5m Number of bays
In x-direction – 6 In y-direction – 5 Spacing between frames
In x-direction – 6m In y-direction – 4.5m Plinth height – 1.5m
Storey height – 3m Height of building-46.5 4.2.2 Material data:
Concrete:
Grade – M25
Density of concrete – 24 KN/m3 Poisson’s ratio – 0.3
Steel:
Steel – Fe500
Density of concrete – 76.5 KN/m3 Poisson’s ratio – 0.2
4.2.3 Earthquake Data:
Frame: Special moment Resisting Frame Location: Zone II, Zone III, Zone IV, Zone V Importance Factor: 1.5
Damping: 5 percent
Type of Soil: Medium (Type 2) Seismic zone factors (z)
Zone I – 0.10 Zone II – 0.16 Zone III – 0.24 Zone V – 0.36 4.2.4 Loading Data:
Wall load : 12 KN/m Live load : 2 KN/m Wind load:
In x-direction (WLx) (according IS875) In y-direction (WLy) (according IS875) Earth quake loads:
In x-direction (EQx) (according IS1893-2002) In y-direction (EQy) (according IS1893-2002) Load combinations:
1.5 (DL + LL)
1.2 (DL + LL ± EQX) 1.2 (DL + LL ± EQY) 1.5 (DL ± EQX) 1.5 (DL± EQY) 0.9 DL ± 1.5 EQX
0.9 DL ± 1.5 EQY
In the present analysis default load combinations are used.
4.2.5 Member sizes:
Size of Beam – 230mmX500mm Size of Plinth beam - 230mmX300mm Size of Column - 300mmX500mm Depth of Slab - 125mm
Thickness of Shear wall - 230mm Thickness of wall – 230mm
64 International Journal for Modern Trends in Science and Technology Clear cover for beams – 25mm
Clear cover for columns – 40mm
4.3 MODELLING:-Core shear wall is provided at the central two bays of the building and edge shear wall is provided at the four edges or corners of the building. The prepared models for core shear wall building and edge shear wall buildings were shown below as 2D and 3D plans, undeformed and deformed shapes and bending moments. Deformed shape sown below is under one earthquake zone.
The bending moments shown below are also in zone V under worst load combination 1.5(DL+WLx).
PREPARED MODELS
General Plan view of G+14 storey RCC building
plan view of G+14 storey RCC building with core shear wall
2D elevation view of G+14 storey RCC building with core shear wall
3D elevation view of G+14 storey RCC building with core shear wall
Undeformed shape of G+14 storey RCC building with core shear wall
Deformed shape of G+14 of G+14 storey RCC building with core shear wall
Bending moment diagram of G+14 storey RCC building with core shear wall
Plan view of G+14 storey RCC building with edge shear wall
65 International Journal for Modern Trends in Science and Technology V.ANALYSIS, RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
5.1 Analysis of Storey Shear: - The maximum storey shear force, displacement and storey drift values are computed from ETBS for all storeys and tabulated.
The maximum storey shears in all models are compared and graphs are drawn, storey number to maximum storey shears in different earthquake zones.
TABLE-5.1: Zone wise maximum storey shears (KN) in ESW and CSW in meters
Graph-5.1: Maximum storey shear graph in zone II
Graph -5.2: Maximum storey shear graph in zone III
Graph -5.3 Maximum storey shear graph in zone IV
Graph -5.4 Maximum storey shear graph in zone V
From the above graphs one can conclude that the maximum storey shears are increasing from top storey to bottom storey and storey shears are
0 1000 2000 3000
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15
MAXIMUM STOREY SHEAR
STOREY NUMBER ZONE II
ESW CSW
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15
MAXIMUM STOREY SHEAR
STOREY NUMBER ZONE III
ESW CSW
0 2000 4000 6000 8000
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15
MAXIMUM STOREY SHEAR
STOREY NUMBER ZONE IV
ESW CSW
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15
MAXIMUM STOREY SHEAR
STOREY NUMBER ZONE V
ESW CSW
STOREY NUMBE
R
ZONE II ZONE III ZONE IV ZONE V ES
W CS
W ES
W CS
W ES
W CS
W ES
W CS
W
BASE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 259
3.3 7
264 6.0 2
414 9.4
423 3.6 3
622 4.1
635 0.4 5
933 6.1 4
952 5.6 8
2 259
3.3 7
264 6.0 2
414 9.4
423 3.6 3
622 4.1
635 0.4 5
933 6.1 4
952 5.6 8
3 259
1.2 6
264 3.8 2
414 6.0 2
423 0.1 9
621 9.0 3
634 5.2 9
932 8.5 4
951 7.9 3
4 258
2.8 2
263 5.2 6
413 2.5 1
421 6.4 2
619 8.7 6
632 4.6 3
929 8.1 5
948 6.9 5
5 256
3.8 2
261 5.9
410 2.1 1
418 5.4 4
615 3.1 6
627 8.1 6
922 9.7 5
941 7.2 4
6 253
0.0 4
258 1.4 8
404 8.0 7
413 0.3 6
607 2.1
619 5.5 4
910 8.1 5
929 3.3 1
7 247
7.2 7
252 7.6 9
396 3.6 2
404 4.3 0
594 5.4 4
606 6.4 5
891 8.1 5
909 9.6 7
8 240
1.2 7
245 0.2 3
384 2.0 3
392 0.3 7
576 3.0 4
588 0.5 6
864 4.2 5
882 0.8 3
9 229
7.8 2
234 4.8 1
367 6.5 2
375 1.5 9
551 4.7 8
562 7.5 4
827 2.1 5
844 1.3
10 216
2.7 2
220 7.1 1
346 0.3 5
353 1.3 7
519 0.5 2
529 7.0 6
778 5.7 8
794 5.5 9
11 199
1.7 2
203 2.8 3
318 6.7 5
325 2.5 3
478 0.1 3
487 8.8 0
717 0.2
731 8.2 0
12 178
0.6 1
181 7.6 8
284 8.9 8
290 8.2 9
427 3.4 8
436 2.4 3
641 0.2 1
654 3.6 5
13 152
5.1 8
155 7.3 4
244 0.2 8
249 1.7 5
366 0.4 2
373 7.6
549 0.6 3
560 6.4 4
14 122
1.1 8
124 7.5 2
195 3.8 9
199 6.0 4
293 0.8 4
299 4.0 6
439 6.2 6
449 1.0 8
15 864
.41 883 .91
138 3.0 6
141 4.2 6
207 4.5 9
212 1.3 9
311 1.8 9
318 2.0 9
16 450
.65 462 .21 721
.03 739 .54
108 1.5 5
110 9.3 1
162 2.2 3
166 3.9 7
66 International Journal for Modern Trends in Science and Technology nearly equal in both the models but more in
building with core shear wall when compared to the building with edge shear walls in all earthquake zones. So shear wall can be chosen based on storey drift.
5.2 Analysis of Storey drift:- Storey drift is the lateral displacement of the storey. It is the drift of one level of a multistorey building relative to the level of below storey.storey and zone wise drifts are shown below
TABLE-5.2: Zone wise maximum storey drifts in ESW and CSW in mm
Graph -5.5 Maximum storey drift graph in zone II
Graph-5.6 Maximum storey drift graph in zone III
Graph-5.7 Maximum storey drift graph in zone IV
Graph-5.8 Maximum storey drift graph in zone V
The maximum storey drift graphs are drawn zone wise and both the models are compared. Storey
0 0.0002 0.0004 0.0006 0.0008 0.001
1 3 5 7 9 111315
Maximum storey drift in mm
STOREY NUMBER
ZONE II
ESW CSW
0.000000 0.000500 0.001000 0.001500
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15
MAXIMUM STOREY DRIFT
STOREY NUMBER
ZONE III
ESW CSW
0 0.0005 0.001 0.0015 0.002
1 3 5 7 9 111315
MAXIMUM STOREY DRIFT
STOREY NUMBER
ZONE IV
ESW CSW
0.000000 0.000500 0.001000 0.001500 0.002000 0.002500 0.003000
1 3 5 7 9 111315
MAXIMUM STOREY DRIFT
STOREY NUMBER
ZONE V
ESW CSW
STORE Y NUMBE
R
ZONE II ZONE III ZONE IV ZONE V ES
W CS
W ES
W CS
W ES
W CS
W ES
W CS
W 1 0.0
001 6
0.0 001 56
0.0 002 11
0.0 001 99
0.0 002 9
0.0 002 56
0.0 003 69
0.0 003 42 2 0.0
002 0.0 001 38
0.0 003 17
0.0 002 03
0.0 004 7
0.0 002 89
0.0 007 08
0.0 004 19 3 0.0
003 1
0.0 001 54
0.0 004 96
0.0 002 42
0.0 007 4
0.0 003 58
0.0 011 07
0.0 005 35 4 0.0
004 17
0.0 001 97
0.0 006 64
0.0 003 10
0.0 009 9
0.0 004 62
0.0 014 87
0.0 006 89 5 0.0
005 11
0.0 002 35
0.0 008 11
0.0 003 72
0.0 012 1
0.0 005 54
0.0 018 12
0.0 008 28 6 0.0
005 9
0.0 002 69
0.0 009 33
0.0 004 25
0.0 013 9
0.0 006 33
0.0 020 84
0.0 009 46 7 0.0
006 5
0.0 002 97
0.0 010 34
0.0 004 70
0.0 015 4
0.0 007 00
0.0 023 10
0.0 010 46 8 0.0
007 0.0 003 21
0.0 011 15
0.0 005 07
0.0 016 6
0.0 007 55
0.0 024 89
0.0 011 28 9 0.0
007 4
0.0 003 39
0.0 011 76
0.0 005 36
0.0 017 6
0.0 007 98
0.0 026 26
0.0 011 92 10 0.0
007 69
0.0 003 53
0.0 012 19
0.0 005 57
0.0 018 2
0.0 008 30
0.0 027 23
0.0 012 39 11 0.0
007 9
0.0 003 62
0.0 012 47
0.0 005 71
0.0 018 6
0.0 008 51
0.0 027 85
0.0 012 70 12 0.0
008 0.0 003 67
0.0 012 61
0.0 005 79
0.0 018 8
0.0 008 62
0.0 028 15
0.0 012 87 13 0.0
008 0.0 003 68
0.0 012 64
0.0 005 80
0.0 018 9
0.0 008 64
0.0 028 17
0.0 012 90 14 0.0
008 0.0 003 67
0.0 012 61
0.0 005 79
0.0 018 8
0.0 008 61
0.0 028 03
0.0 012 84 15 0.0
008 0.0 003 67
0.0 012 59
0.0 005 77
0.0 018 7
0.0 008 57
0.0 027 79
0.0 012 76 16 0.0
008 25
0.0 003 77
0.0 012 76
0.0 005 76
0.0 018 78
0.0 008 42
0.0 027 81
0.0 012 41
67 International Journal for Modern Trends in Science and Technology drifts are maximum in building model with edge
shear wall compared to core shear wall in all seismic zones. Storey drifts are based storey strength. Drifts are higher if strength is low. So core shear wall is preferable in any earthquake zone to minimize the effect of seismic forces on multistory building.
5.3 Analysis of Storey displacements:- Storey displacements are the vertical displacements of members, occurs due to dead and live loads.
Storey Number Edge Shear Wall Core Shear Wall
BASE 0 0
1 0.0028 0.0027
2 0.0082 0.008
3 0.0133 0.0128
4 0.0179 0.0173
5 0.0222 0.0213
6 0.0261 0.0251
7 0.0296 0.0284
8 0.0328 0.0314
9 0.0356 0.0341
10 0.0380 0.0364
11 0.0401 0.0384
12 0.0419 0.0400
13 0.0433 0.0413
14 0.0443 0.0423
15 0.0450 0.0430
16 0.0454 0.0433
TABLE-5.3: Comparison table for Maximum storey displacements in meters in Earthquake Zones – II, III, IV and V in building with edge wall and building with core shear wall
Grpah-5.9 Comparison for Maximum storey displacement in edge and core shear wall building Core shear wall shows the lower displacements than edge shear wall. So core shear wall should be adopted in the building.
5.4 Lateral Storey stiffness:- Lateral stiffness plays an important role in overall response of buildings
TABLE-5.4: Storey Stiffness for ESW and CSW in zones II and III
0 0.0050.01 0.0150.02 0.0250.03 0.0350.04 0.0450.05
0 10 20
MAXIMUM STOREY DISPLACEMENTS
STOREY NUMBER
Maximum Storey Displacements
ESW CSW
STO REY
NU MB ER
ZONE II ZONE III
ESW CSW ESW CSW
FO RC E (kN)
DRI FT (mm )
FO RC E (kN)
DRI FT (mm )
FO RC E (kN)
DRI FT (mm )
FO RC E (kN)
DRI FT (mm ) BAS
E 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 259 3.3 7
0.00 015 5
264 6.0 2
0.00 015 6
414 9.4
0.00 021 1
423 3.6 3
0.00 019 9 2 259
3.3 7
0.00 020 2
264 6.0 2
0.00 013 8
414 9.4
0.00 031 7
423 3.6 3
0.00 020 3 3 259
1.2 6
0.00 031 4
264 3.8 2
0.00 015 4
414 6.0 2
0.00 049 6
423 0.1 9
0.00 024 2 4 258
2.8 2
0.00 041 7
263 5.2 6
0.00 019 7
413 2.5 1
0.00 066 4
421 6.4 2
0.00 031 0 5 256
3.8 2
0.00 051 1
261 5.9
0.00 023 5
410 2.1 1
0.00 081 1
418 5.4 4
0.00 037 2 6 253
0.0 4
0.00 058 8
258 1.4 8
0.00 026 9
404 8.0 7
0.00 093 3
413 0.3 6
0.00 042 5 7 247
7.2 7
0.00 065 2
252 7.6 9
0.00 029 7
396 3.6 2
0.00 103 4
404 4.3 0
0.00 047 0 8 240
1.2 7
0.00 070 2
245 0.2 3
0.00 032 1
384 2.0 3
0.00 111 5
392 0.3 7
0.00 050 7 9 229
7.8 2
0.00 074 1
234 4.8 1
0.00 033 9
367 6.5 2
0.00 117 6
375 1.5 9
0.00 053 6 10 216
2.7 2
0.00 076 9
220 7.1 1
0.00 035 3
346 0.3 5
0.00 121 9
353 1.3 7
0.00 055 7 11 199
1.7 2
0.00 078 6
203 2.8 3
0.00 036 2
318 6.7 5
0.00 124 7
325 2.5 3
0.00 057 1 12 178
0.6 1
0.00 079 5
181 7.6 8
0.00 036 7
284 8.9 8
0.00 126 1
290 8.2 9
0.00 057 9 13 152
5.1 8
0.00 079 8
155 7.3 4
0.00 036 8
244 0.2 8
0.00 126 4
249 1.7 5
0.00 058 0 14 122
1.1 8
0.00 079 9
124 7.5 2
0.00 036 7
195 3.8 9
0.00 126 1
199 6.0 4
0.00 057 9 15 864
.41 0.00
080 3
883 .91
0.00 036 7
138 3.0 6
0.00 125 9
141 4.2 6
0.00 057 7 16 450
.65 0.00
082 5
462 .21
0.00 037 7
721 .03
0.00 127 6
739 .54
0.00 057 6
68 International Journal for Modern Trends in Science and Technology TABLE-5.5: Storey Stiffness for ESW and CSW in
zones IV and V
Graph-6.0 Lateral storey stiffness graph in zone II
Graph-6.1 Lateral storey stiffness graph in zone III
Graph-6.2 Lateral storey stiffness graph in zone IV
Graph-6.3 Lateral storey stiffness graph in zone V
For the given lateral loads core shear wall model shows better stiffness than the edge shear wall model. In all earth quake zones core shear wall model shows good performance for controlling the lateral displacement of the building. So core shear wall should provide in a structure to minimize the effect of lateral loads.
From the analysis it is understandable that, core shear wall in building shows better performance under lateral loads in earthquake zones II,III,IV and V. so to control the storey drift and other parameters like storey shears and storey displacement core shear wall must be provided in multistory building under any earth quake zone.
0 1000 2000 3000
0 0.0005 0.001
storey shear in kN
storey drift in mm
Zone II
ESW CSW
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
0 0.0005 0.001 0.0015
storey shear in kN
storey drift in mm
ZONE III
ESW CSW
0 2000 4000 6000 8000
0 0.001 0.002
storey shear in kN
storey drift in mm
ZONE IV
ESW CSW
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000
0 0.001 0.002 0.003
storey shear in kN
storey drift in mm
ZONE V
ESW CSW
STO REY
NU MB ER
ZONE IV ZONE V
ESW CSW ESW CSW
FO RC E
DRI FT
FO RC E
DRI FT
FO RC E
DRI FT
FO RC E
DRI FT BAS
E 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 622 4.1
0.00 028 5
635 0.4 5
0.00 025 6
933 6.1 4
0.00 036 9
952 5.6 8
0.00 034 2 2 622
4.1 0.00
047 4
635 0.4 5
0.00 028 9
933 6.1 4
0.00 070 8
952 5.6 8
0.00 041 9 3 621
9.0 3
0.00 074 0
634 5.2 9
0.00 035 8
932 8.5 4
0.00 110 7
951 7.9 3
0.00 053 5 4 619
8.7 6
0.00 099 3
632 4.6 3
0.00 046 2
929 8.1 5
0.00 148 7
948 6.9 5
0.00 068 9 5 615
3.1 6
0.00 121 2
627 8.1 6
0.00 055 4
922 9.7 5
0.00 181 2
941 7.2 4
0.00 082 8 6 607
2.1 0.00
139 4
619 5.5 4
0.00 063 3
910 8.1 5
0.00 208 4
929 3.3 1
0.00 094 6 7 594
5.4 4
0.00 154 4
606 6.4 5
0.00 070 0
891 8.1 5
0.00 231 0
909 9.6 7
0.00 104 6 8 576
3.0 4
0.00 166 4
588 0.5 6
0.00 075 5
864 4.2 5
0.00 248 9
882 0.8 3
0.00 112 8 9 551
4.7 8
0.00 175 6
562 7.5 4
0.00 079 8
827 2.1 5
0.00 262 6
844 1.3
0.00 119 2 10 519
0.5 2
0.00 182 1
529 7.0 6
0.00 083 0
778 5.7 8
0.00 272 3
794 5.5 9
0.00 123 9 11 478
0.1 3
0.00 186 2
487 8.8 0
0.00 085 1
717 0.2
0.00 278 5
731 8.2 0
0.00 127 0 12 427
3.4 8
0.00 188 2
436 2.4 3
0.00 086 2
641 0.2 1
0.00 281 5
654 3.6 5
0.00 128 7 13 366
0.4 2
0.00 188 5
373 7.6
0.00 086 4
549 0.6 3
0.00 281 7
560 6.4 4
0.00 129 0 14 293
0.8 4
0.00 187 8
299 4.0 6
0.00 086 1
439 6.2 6
0.00 280 3
449 1.0 8
0.00 128 4 15 207
4.5 9
0.00 186 7
212 1.3 9
0.00 085 7
311 1.8 9
0.00 277 9
318 2.0 9
0.00 127 6 16 108
1.5 5
0.00 187 8
110 9.3 1
0.00 084 2
162 2.2 3
0.00 278 1
166 3.9 7
0.00 124 1
69 International Journal for Modern Trends in Science and Technology V. CONCLUSION
1 The dynamic analysis of building with core shear wall and building with edge shear walls are done and compared at earthquake zones II, III, IV and V.
2 Core shear wall and Edge shear wall gives the nearly equal storey shears in all storeys at all earthquake zones. So selection of shear wall is mainly based on storey drift.
3 When shear walls are provided on the four edges, maximum storey drifts are increased compared to the shear walls provided at centre in all zones. So by providing core shear wall, effect of seismic forces can be controlled.
4 Storey displacements are maximum in edge shear wall than core shear wall in the building.
5 For better seismic performance of building, it should have adequate lateral storey stiffness. If lateral storey displacements are high, stiffness will be low or vice-versa.
6 So to minimize the earth quake effects core shear wall must be provided because storey drifts are low compared to edge shear wall in earthquake zones II, III, IV and V.
VI. REFERENCES
[1] Mayuri D. Bhagwat, Dr.P.S.Patil, “Comparative Study of Performance of Rcc Multistory Building For Koyna and Bhuj Earthquakes”,International Journal of Advanced Technology in Engineering and Science www.ijates.com Volume No.02, Issue No. 07, July 2014 ISSN (online): 2348–7550.
[2] Mohit Sharma, Dr. SavitaMaru, “Dynamic Analysis of Multistoried Regular Building” IOSR Journal of Mechanical and Civil Engineering (IOSR-JMCE) e-ISSN: 2278-1684,p-ISSN: 2320-334X, Volume 11,Issue 1 Ver. II (Jan. 2014), PP 37-42, www.iosrjournals.org
[3] A S Patil and P D Kumbhar, “Time History Analysis of Multistoried Rcc Buildings For Different Seismic Intensities“ ISSN 2319 –6009, www.ijscer.com, Vol.2, No. 3,August 2013 © 2013 IJSCER.
[4] PankajAgarwal and Manish Shrinkhade“
Earthquake resistant design of structures “, PHI press, New delhi.
[5] Roy R. Craig, Andrew J. Kurdila “Fundamentals of Structural Dynamics”, 2nd Edition
[6] Anil K. Chopra “Dynamics of Structures: Theory and Applications to Earthquake Engineering” Prentice Hall, 2012.
[7] S.K Duggal “Earthquake resistant design of structures” Oxford university Press, New Delhi. IS 1893(part 1):2002 “criteria for earthquake resistant design of structures” BIS, New Delhi.
[8] Deshmukh S.N. and Sabihuddin S. “Seismic Analysis of Multistorey Building Using Composite
Structure” Earthquake Analysis and Design of Structures, D-56-D-61.
[9] ETABS – v9.7 – Integrated Building Design Software,manual, Computer and Structures, Inc., Berkeley, California, USA, November 2005.
